[Vtun-Users] performance with vtun-ppp

Hi all,
I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two remote sites.
Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was capping at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of ppp, turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set up several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two sites:
I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or some shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, the other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or per-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there weren't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without vtund.
I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can reach 10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed was maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE 10.1 DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I actually could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance issue was related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based on TUN instead of ppp :
I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance ( and yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was worse than one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interfaces, as I usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). It appears that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
Any help appreciated...
Here's the configuration
Host 1:
Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Host 2:
Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Thanks!
--
Tomte
____________________________________________________________________
Nagyobb szabadságra vágysz? Törj ki a négy fal közül!
Start ADSL előfizetésedhez az EuroWeb mostantól havi 100 perc ingyenes WiFi hozzáférést biztosít számodra.
Részletek: http://www.freestart.hu

Thread view

Hi all,
I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two remote sites.
Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was capping at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of ppp, turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set up several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two sites:
I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or some shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, the other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or per-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there weren't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without vtund.
I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can reach 10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed was maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE 10.1 DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I actually could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance issue was related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based on TUN instead of ppp :
I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance ( and yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was worse than one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interfaces, as I usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). It appears that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
Any help appreciated...
Here's the configuration
Host 1:
Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Host 2:
Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Thanks!
--
Tomte
____________________________________________________________________
Nagyobb szabadságra vágysz? Törj ki a négy fal közül!
Start ADSL előfizetésedhez az EuroWeb mostantól havi 100 perc ingyenes WiFi hozzáférést biztosít számodra.
Részletek: http://www.freestart.hu

Hi all,
I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two remote sites.
Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was capping at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of ppp, turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set up several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two sites:
I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or some shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, the other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or per-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there weren't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without vtund.
I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can reach 10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed was maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE 10.1 DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I actually could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance issue was related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based on TUN instead of ppp :
I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance ( and yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was worse than one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interfaces, as I usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). It appears that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
Any help appreciated...
Here's the configuration
Host 1:
Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Host 2:
Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Thanks!
--
Tomte
____________________________________________________________________
Nagyobb szabadságra vágysz? Törj ki a négy fal közül!
Start ADSL előfizetésedhez az EuroWeb mostantól havi 100 perc ingyenes WiFi hozzáférést biztosít számodra.
Részletek: http://www.freestart.hu

I would try between 2 hosts on a 10/100 local network and see what
you get there.
I've been using vtun-ppp for about 3 years now and I do occasionally run
into slowness issues. I attribute my slowness to DSL + extra overhead.
I've also ran into a unique problem where on a 10/100 local network it
takes about 2 or 3 attempts for the ppp to actually negotiate a
connection. I have a lab setup and I use vtun-ppp in the lab on our
LAN. When I fire up the client -> server I see "Timeout sending LCP
requests" in syslog on the server and client. Over WAN I can get a
connection each time. Over LAN I get those errors. I've even seen it
take vtun up to 10 attempts to get a connection on the LAN.
On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 15:15 +0200, houga@... wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two re=
mote sites.
> Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
> I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was capp=
ing at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of pp=
p, turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set up =
several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp c=
onnections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two sites=
:
> I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
> That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
> At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or som=
e shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, th=
e other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or pe=
r-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there were=
n't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without vtun=
d.
> I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can re=
ach 10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed was =
maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE 10=
.1 DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I actu=
ally could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance issue=
was related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based o=
n TUN instead of ppp :
> I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance ( =
and yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was wors=
e than one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interface=
s, as I usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). It=
appears that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
>=20
> Any help appreciated...
>=20
> Here's the configuration
> Host 1:=20
> Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
> 1G RAM
> SuSE 9.2
> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>=20
> Host 2:
> Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
> 1G RAM
> SuSE 9.2
> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>=20
>=20
> Thanks!
>=20
> --
> Tomte
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Nagyobb szabads=C3=A1gra v=C3=A1gysz? T=C3=B6rj ki a n=C3=A9gy fal k=C3=
=B6z=C3=BCl!
> Start ADSL el=C5=91fizet=C3=A9sedhez az EuroWeb mostant=C3=B3l havi 100=
perc ingyenes WiFi hozz=C3=A1f=C3=A9r=C3=A9st biztos=C3=ADt sz=C3=A1modr=
a.
> R=C3=A9szletek: http://www.freestart.hu
>=20
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securit=
y?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job =
easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geron=
imo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=
=3D121642
> _______________________________________________ Vtun-Users mailing list=
Vtun-Users@... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/lis=
tinfo/vtun-users

Thanks for answering me.
I don't think my problem lies with ppp, as I have never encountered any=20
of the troubles you describe. I mean i do have a problem with ppp, but=20
it's about its perfomance rather than its ability to hook up. The only=20
ppp negociation catch I ran through was the common "serial line is=20
looped back", which happens quite rarely.
Thanks,
tomte
After a long battle with technology, Christopher Fowler said the=20
following on 27/06/06 15:39:
> I would try between 2 hosts on a 10/100 local network and see what
> you get there.
>
> I've been using vtun-ppp for about 3 years now and I do occasionally ru=
n
> into slowness issues. I attribute my slowness to DSL + extra overhead.
>
> I've also ran into a unique problem where on a 10/100 local network it
> takes about 2 or 3 attempts for the ppp to actually negotiate a
> connection. I have a lab setup and I use vtun-ppp in the lab on our
> LAN. When I fire up the client -> server I see "Timeout sending LCP
> requests" in syslog on the server and client. Over WAN I can get a
> connection each time. Over LAN I get those errors. I've even seen it
> take vtun up to 10 attempts to get a connection on the LAN.
>
> On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 15:15 +0200, houga@... wrote:
> =20
>> Hi all,
>> I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two r=
emote sites.
>> Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
>> I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was cap=
ping at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of p=
pp, turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set up=
several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp =
connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two site=
s:
>> I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
>> That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
>> At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or so=
me shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, t=
he other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or p=
er-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there wer=
en't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without vtu=
nd.
>> I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can r=
each 10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed was=
maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE 1=
0.1 DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I act=
ually could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance issu=
e was related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based =
on TUN instead of ppp :
>> I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance (=
and yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was wor=
se than one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interfac=
es, as I usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). I=
t appears that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
>>
>> Any help appreciated...
>>
>> Here's the configuration
>> Host 1:=20
>> Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
>> 1G RAM
>> SuSE 9.2
>> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
>> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>>
>> Host 2:
>> Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
>> 1G RAM
>> SuSE 9.2
>> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
>> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> --
>> Tomte
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>> Nagyobb szabads=C3=A1gra v=C3=A1gysz? T=C3=B6rj ki a n=C3=A9gy fal k=C3=
=B6z=C3=BCl!
>> Start ADSL el=C5=91fizet=C3=A9sedhez az EuroWeb mostant=C3=B3l havi 10=
0 perc ingyenes WiFi hozz=C3=A1f=C3=A9r=C3=A9st biztos=C3=ADt sz=C3=A1mod=
ra.
>> R=C3=A9szletek: http://www.freestart.hu
>>
>> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securi=
ty?
>> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job=
easier
>> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Gero=
nimo
>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&da=
t=3D121642
>> _______________________________________________ Vtun-Users mailing lis=
t Vtun-Users@... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/li=
stinfo/vtun-users
>> =20
>
>
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securit=
y?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job =
easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geron=
imo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=
=3D121642
> _______________________________________________
> Vtun-Users mailing list
> Vtun-Users@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
> =20

Are you using DSL?
=20
If yes, I think DSL queues in the DSL device could be the cause of =
slowness.
In the (very) past, I ran into similar issues when using DSL devices as
routers. After bridging ethernet interfaces with DSL devices I got full
speed. The idea is running DSL device as a sort of modem and
dual/mutli-homed vtun servers (one interface to LAN, the oher(s) to
DSL/CATV/etc.).
=20
Resuming: UDP, lzo:9 compression, no encryption and bridged interfaces =
are
the speediest settings for me.
=20
--Miguel
_____ =20
De: vtun-users-bounces@...
[mailto:vtun-users-bounces@...] En nombre de
houga@...
Enviado el: martes, 27 de junio de 2006 21:55
Para: vtun-users@...
CC: Christopher Fowler
Asunto: Re: [Vtun-Users] performance with vtun-ppp
Thanks for answering me.
I don't think my problem lies with ppp, as I have never encountered any =
of
the troubles you describe. I mean i do have a problem with ppp, but it's
about its perfomance rather than its ability to hook up. The only ppp
negociation catch I ran through was the common "serial line is looped =
back",
which happens quite rarely.=20
Thanks,
tomte
After a long battle with technology, Christopher Fowler said the =
following
on 27/06/06 15:39:=20
I would try between 2 hosts on a 10/100 local network and see what
you get there.
I've been using vtun-ppp for about 3 years now and I do occasionally run
into slowness issues. I attribute my slowness to DSL + extra overhead.
I've also ran into a unique problem where on a 10/100 local network it
takes about 2 or 3 attempts for the ppp to actually negotiate a
connection. I have a lab setup and I use vtun-ppp in the lab on our
LAN. When I fire up the client -> server I see "Timeout sending LCP
requests" in syslog on the server and client. Over WAN I can get a
connection each time. Over LAN I get those errors. I've even seen it
take vtun up to 10 attempts to get a connection on the LAN.
On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 15:15 +0200, houga@... wrote:
=20
Hi all,
I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two =
remote
sites.
Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was =
capping
at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of ppp,
turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set up
several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp
connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two =
sites:
I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or some
shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, the
other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or
per-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there
weren't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without
vtund.
I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can =
reach
10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed was
maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE =
10.1
DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I =
actually
could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance issue was
related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based on =
TUN
instead of ppp :
I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance ( =
and
yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was worse =
than
one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interfaces, as I
usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). It =
appears
that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
Any help appreciated...
Here's the configuration
Host 1:=20
Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Host 2:
Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Thanks!
--
Tomte
____________________________________________________________________
Nagyobb szabads=E1gra v=E1gysz? T=F6rj ki a n=E9gy fal k=F6z=FCl!
Start ADSL el=F5fizet=E9sedhez az EuroWeb mostant=F3l havi 100 perc =
ingyenes WiFi
hozz=E1f=E9r=E9st biztos=EDt sz=E1modra.
R=E9szletek: http://www.freestart.hu
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job
easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk
<http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D=
121642>
&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D121642
_______________________________________________ Vtun-Users mailing list
Vtun-Users@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
=20
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job
easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk
<http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D=
121642>
&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D121642
_______________________________________________
Vtun-Users mailing list
Vtun-Users@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
=20

Hi Miguel,
No, I'm not using DSL, but 5.4Ghz radio links to backbone relays. The=20
latency is very good:
outside the vpn (14 hops) :
rtt min/avg/max/mdev =3D 163.682/165.104/167.786/1.636 ms
between ppp interfaces setup by vtund :
165.026/165.614/166.400/0.668 ms
i just tried with one tun interface : UDP, no encryption. I played with=20
every level of lzo compression : still capping at 170Kbyte/s.
Is there a way to bond tun interface together?
thanks
tomte
After a long battle with technology, Miguel A. Novo said the following=20
on 28/06/06 8:31:
> Are you using DSL?
> =20
> If yes, I think DSL queues in the DSL device could be the cause of=20
> slowness. In the (very) past, I ran into similar issues when using DSL=20
> devices as routers. After bridging ethernet interfaces with DSL=20
> devices I got full speed. The idea is running DSL device as a sort of=20
> modem and dual/mutli-homed vtun servers (one interface to LAN, the=20
> oher(s) to DSL/CATV/etc.).
> =20
> Resuming: UDP, lzo:9 compression, no encryption and bridged interfaces=20
> are the speediest settings for me.
> =20
> --Miguel
>
> *De:* vtun-users-bounces@...=20
> [mailto:vtun-users-bounces@...] *En nombre de=20
> *houga@...
> *Enviado el:* martes, 27 de junio de 2006 21:55
> *Para:* vtun-users@...
> *CC:* Christopher Fowler
> *Asunto:* Re: [Vtun-Users] performance with vtun-ppp
>
> Thanks for answering me.
> I don't think my problem lies with ppp, as I have never encountered=20
> any of the troubles you describe. I mean i do have a problem with ppp,=20
> but it's about its perfomance rather than its ability to hook up. The=20
> only ppp negociation catch I ran through was the common "serial line=20
> is looped back", which happens quite rarely.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tomte
>
>
> After a long battle with technology, Christopher Fowler said the=20
> following on 27/06/06 15:39:
>> I would try between 2 hosts on a 10/100 local network and see what
>> you get there.
>>
>> I've been using vtun-ppp for about 3 years now and I do occasionally r=
un
>> into slowness issues. I attribute my slowness to DSL + extra overhead=
.
>>
>> I've also ran into a unique problem where on a 10/100 local network it
>> takes about 2 or 3 attempts for the ppp to actually negotiate a
>> connection. I have a lab setup and I use vtun-ppp in the lab on our
>> LAN. When I fire up the client -> server I see "Timeout sending LCP
>> requests" in syslog on the server and client. Over WAN I can get a
>> connection each time. Over LAN I get those errors. I've even seen it
>> take vtun up to 10 attempts to get a connection on the LAN.
>>
>> On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 15:15 +0200, houga@... <mailto:houga@...=
eestart.hu> wrote:
>> =20
>>> Hi all,
>>> I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two =
remote sites.
>>> Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
>>> I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was ca=
pping at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of =
ppp, turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set u=
p several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp=
connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two sit=
es:
>>> I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
>>> That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
>>> At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or s=
ome shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, =
the other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or =
per-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there we=
ren't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without vt=
und.
>>> I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can =
reach 10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed wa=
s maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE =
10.1 DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I ac=
tually could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance iss=
ue was related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based=
on TUN instead of ppp :
>>> I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance =
( and yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was wo=
rse than one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interfa=
ces, as I usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). =
It appears that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
>>>
>>> Any help appreciated...
>>>
>>> Here's the configuration
>>> Host 1:=20
>>> Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
>>> 1G RAM
>>> SuSE 9.2
>>> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
>>> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>>>
>>> Host 2:
>>> Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
>>> 1G RAM
>>> SuSE 9.2
>>> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
>>> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tomte
>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>> Nagyobb szabads=E1gra v=E1gysz? T=F6rj ki a n=E9gy fal k=F6z=FCl!
>>> Start ADSL el=F5fizet=E9sedhez az EuroWeb mostant=F3l havi 100 perc i=
ngyenes WiFi hozz=E1f=E9r=E9st biztos=EDt sz=E1modra.
>>> R=E9szletek: http://www.freestart.hu <http://www.freestart.hu&gt;
>>>
>>> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, secur=
ity?
>>> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your jo=
b easier
>>> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Ger=
onimo
>>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&d=
at=3D121642 <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D=
263057&dat=3D121642>
>>> _______________________________________________ Vtun-Users mailing li=
st Vtun-Users@... <mailto:Vtun-Users@...=
net> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
>>> =20
>> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securi=
ty?
>> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job=
easier
>> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Gero=
nimo
>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&da=
t=3D121642 <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D=
263057&dat=3D121642>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Vtun-Users mailing list
>> Vtun-Users@... <mailto:Vtun-Users@...=
net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
>> =20
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
>
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securit=
y?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job =
easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geron=
imo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=
=3D121642
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vtun-Users mailing list
> Vtun-Users@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
> =20

I just make a test.
=20
Between:
=20
1)
=20
4 mbit/s link upload---->>>> <<<<<----- 1 mbit/s link download
=20
scp root@...:/home/media/PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe .
PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe
100% 12MB 100.4KB/s 02:03
=20
=20
2)
=20
4 mbit/s upload ---->>>> <<<<<----- 4 mbit/s download
=20
scp root@...:/home/media/PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe .
PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe
100% 12MB 316.6KB/s 00:39
In 1) there was no traffic. In 2), with other traffics sharing the link.
=20
=20
Perhaps MTU could help. We are using 1450 MTU in vtund.conf to avoid
fragmentation:
=20
ifconfig "%% 192.168.31.243 pointopoint 192.168.34.243 mtu 1450"
=20
=20
And no: No way to bind tun interfaces, I guess.
=20
=20
--Miguel
_____ =20
De: houga@... [mailto:houga@...]=20
Enviado el: mi=E9rcoles, 28 de junio de 2006 11:32
Para: Miguel A. Novo
CC: vtun-users@...
Asunto: Re: [Vtun-Users] performance with vtun-ppp
Hi Miguel,
No, I'm not using DSL, but 5.4Ghz radio links to backbone relays. The
latency is very good:
outside the vpn (14 hops) :
rtt min/avg/max/mdev =3D 163.682/165.104/167.786/1.636 ms
between ppp interfaces setup by vtund :
165.026/165.614/166.400/0.668 ms
i just tried with one tun interface : UDP, no encryption. I played with
every level of lzo compression : still capping at 170Kbyte/s.=20
Is there a way to bond tun interface together?
thanks
tomte
After a long battle with technology, Miguel A. Novo said the following =
on
28/06/06 8:31:=20
Are you using DSL?=20
=20
If yes, I think DSL queues in the DSL device could be the cause of =
slowness.
In the (very) past, I ran into similar issues when using DSL devices as
routers. After bridging ethernet interfaces with DSL devices I got full
speed. The idea is running DSL device as a sort of modem and
dual/mutli-homed vtun servers (one interface to LAN, the oher(s) to
DSL/CATV/etc.).=20
=20
Resuming: UDP, lzo:9 compression, no encryption and bridged interfaces =
are
the speediest settings for me.=20
=20
--Miguel=20
De: vtun-users-bounces@...
[mailto:vtun-users-bounces@...] En nombre de
houga@...
Enviado el: martes, 27 de junio de 2006 21:55
Para: vtun-users@...
CC: Christopher Fowler
Asunto: Re: [Vtun-Users] performance with vtun-ppp
Thanks for answering me.
I don't think my problem lies with ppp, as I have never encountered any =
of
the troubles you describe. I mean i do have a problem with ppp, but it's
about its perfomance rather than its ability to hook up. The only ppp
negociation catch I ran through was the common "serial line is looped =
back",
which happens quite rarely.=20
Thanks,
tomte
After a long battle with technology, Christopher Fowler said the =
following
on 27/06/06 15:39:=20
I would try between 2 hosts on a 10/100 local network and see what
you get there.
I've been using vtun-ppp for about 3 years now and I do occasionally run
into slowness issues. I attribute my slowness to DSL + extra overhead.
I've also ran into a unique problem where on a 10/100 local network it
takes about 2 or 3 attempts for the ppp to actually negotiate a
connection. I have a lab setup and I use vtun-ppp in the lab on our
LAN. When I fire up the client -> server I see "Timeout sending LCP
requests" in syslog on the server and client. Over WAN I can get a
connection each time. Over LAN I get those errors. I've even seen it
take vtun up to 10 attempts to get a connection on the LAN.
On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 15:15 +0200, houga@... wrote:
=20
Hi all,
I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two =
remote
sites.
Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was =
capping
at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of ppp,
turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set up
several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all ppp
connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two =
sites:
I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or some
shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France, the
other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or
per-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there
weren't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without
vtund.
I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can =
reach
10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed was
maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE =
10.1
DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I =
actually
could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance issue was
related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but based on =
TUN
instead of ppp :
I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance ( =
and
yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was worse =
than
one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interfaces, as I
usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc). It =
appears
that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
Any help appreciated...
Here's the configuration
Host 1:=20
Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Host 2:
Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
1G RAM
SuSE 9.2
2.6.8-24.3-smp
VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
Thanks!
--
Tomte
____________________________________________________________________
Nagyobb szabads=E1gra v=E1gysz? T=F6rj ki a n=E9gy fal k=F6z=FCl!
Start ADSL el=F5fizet=E9sedhez az EuroWeb mostant=F3l havi 100 perc =
ingyenes WiFi
hozz=E1f=E9r=E9st biztos=EDt sz=E1modra.
R=E9szletek: http://www.freestart.hu
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job
easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk
<http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D=
121642>
&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D121642
_______________________________________________ Vtun-Users mailing list
Vtun-Users@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
=20
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job
easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk
<http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D=
121642>
&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D121642
_______________________________________________
Vtun-Users mailing list
Vtun-Users@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
=20
_____ =20
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job
easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk
<http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D=
121642>
&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D121642
_____ =20
_______________________________________________
Vtun-Users mailing list
Vtun-Users@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
=20

Thanks
i'll try to play with the MTU again... actually I already tried 1500 and=20
1450
maybe I should decrease it more...
I'll keep you posted
thanks again
-
tomte
After a long battle with technology, Miguel A. Novo said the following=20
on 28/06/06 12:16:
> I just make a test.
> =20
> Between:
> =20
> 1)
> =20
> 4 mbit/s link upload---->>>> <<<<<----- 1 mbit/s link download
> =20
> scp root@...:/home/media/PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe=20
> <mailto:root@...:/home/media/PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe> .
> PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe =
=20
> 100% 12MB 100.4KB/s 02:03
> =20
> =20
> 2)
> =20
> 4 mbit/s upload ---->>>> <<<<<----- 4 mbit/s download
> =20
> scp root@...:/home/media/PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe=20
> <mailto:root@...:/home/media/PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe> .
> PDFCreator-0_9_2_GPLGhostscript.exe =
=20
> 100% 12MB 316.6KB/s 00:39
> In 1) there was no traffic. In 2), with other traffics sharing the link=
.
> =20
> =20
> Perhaps MTU could help. We are using 1450 MTU in vtund.conf to avoid=20
> fragmentation:
> =20
> ifconfig "%% 192.168.31.243 pointopoint 192.168.34.243 mtu 1450"
> =20
> =20
> And no: No way to bind tun interfaces, I guess.
> =20
> =20
> --Miguel
>
> *De:* houga@... [mailto:houga@...]
> *Enviado el:* mi=E9rcoles, 28 de junio de 2006 11:32
> *Para:* Miguel A. Novo
> *CC:* vtun-users@...
> *Asunto:* Re: [Vtun-Users] performance with vtun-ppp
>
> Hi Miguel,
> No, I'm not using DSL, but 5.4Ghz radio links to backbone relays. The=20
> latency is very good:
>
> outside the vpn (14 hops) :
> rtt min/avg/max/mdev =3D 163.682/165.104/167.786/1.636 ms
>
> between ppp interfaces setup by vtund :
> 165.026/165.614/166.400/0.668 ms
>
>
> i just tried with one tun interface : UDP, no encryption. I played=20
> with every level of lzo compression : still capping at 170Kbyte/s.
>
> Is there a way to bond tun interface together?
>
> thanks
>
> tomte
>
>
>
>
> After a long battle with technology, Miguel A. Novo said the following=20
> on 28/06/06 8:31:
>> Are you using DSL?
>> =20
>> If yes, I think DSL queues in the DSL device could be the cause of=20
>> slowness. In the (very) past, I ran into similar issues when using=20
>> DSL devices as routers. After bridging ethernet interfaces with DSL=20
>> devices I got full speed. The idea is running DSL device as a sort of=20
>> modem and dual/mutli-homed vtun servers (one interface to LAN, the=20
>> oher(s) to DSL/CATV/etc.).
>> =20
>> Resuming: UDP, lzo:9 compression, no encryption and bridged=20
>> interfaces are the speediest settings for me.
>> =20
>> --Miguel
>>
>> *De:* vtun-users-bounces@...=20
>> <mailto:vtun-users-bounces@...>=20
>> [mailto:vtun-users-bounces@...] *En nombre de=20
>> *houga@... <mailto:houga@...>
>> *Enviado el:* martes, 27 de junio de 2006 21:55
>> *Para:* vtun-users@...=20
>> <mailto:vtun-users@...>
>> *CC:* Christopher Fowler
>> *Asunto:* Re: [Vtun-Users] performance with vtun-ppp
>>
>> Thanks for answering me.
>> I don't think my problem lies with ppp, as I have never encountered=20
>> any of the troubles you describe. I mean i do have a problem with=20
>> ppp, but it's about its perfomance rather than its ability to hook=20
>> up. The only ppp negociation catch I ran through was the common=20
>> "serial line is looped back", which happens quite rarely.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> tomte
>>
>>
>> After a long battle with technology, Christopher Fowler said the=20
>> following on 27/06/06 15:39:
>>> I would try between 2 hosts on a 10/100 local network and see what
>>> you get there.
>>>
>>> I've been using vtun-ppp for about 3 years now and I do occasionally =
run
>>> into slowness issues. I attribute my slowness to DSL + extra overhea=
d.
>>>
>>> I've also ran into a unique problem where on a 10/100 local network i=
t
>>> takes about 2 or 3 attempts for the ppp to actually negotiate a
>>> connection. I have a lab setup and I use vtun-ppp in the lab on our
>>> LAN. When I fire up the client -> server I see "Timeout sending LCP
>>> requests" in syslog on the server and client. Over WAN I can get a
>>> connection each time. Over LAN I get those errors. I've even seen i=
t
>>> take vtun up to 10 attempts to get a connection on the LAN.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 15:15 +0200, houga@... <mailto:houga@...=
reestart.hu> wrote:
>>> =20
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I have been using vtun for a year now to establish a vpn between two=
remote sites.
>>>> Both sites have an internet 10Mbit/s link (symetrical).
>>>> I started with one vtun tcp ppp connection, and the connection was c=
apping at 170-190kbyte/s, no matter what I tried (changing the MTU/MRU of=
ppp, turning vtun compression and encryption on and off...). Then I set =
up several vtun instances, running ppp with the multilink option : all pp=
p connections bundle together to have one fat ppp pipe between the two si=
tes:
>>>> I managed to get 3 vtun-ppp that agregate and reach 390kbyte/s.
>>>> That was better, but not 10Mbit/s.
>>>> At that point I was thinking that there was some peering problem or =
some shaping was happening somewhere between the two ISPs (one in France,=
the other in the USA). I checked with them if there was a per-thread, or=
per-protocol or per host-to-host connection limit, and both said there w=
eren't any limit in any way. So I started testing the bandwidth without v=
tund.
>>>> I noticed that if I run up to 4 ftp sessions at the same time, I can=
reach 10Mbit/s, and it's not burst: i did several tests and this speed w=
as maintained for hours. I did the same with wget (grabbing the last SuSE=
10.1 DVD isos), same thing : 10Mbit/s. I came to the conclusion that I a=
ctually could reach 10Mbit/s between the two sites, and my performance is=
sue was related to vtun.. or ppp... so I set up a vtun instance, but base=
d on TUN instead of ppp :
>>>> I reached the same speed of 160kbyte/s as with a single ppp instance=
( and yes I turned off encryption and/or compression). Actually it was w=
orse than one ppp. I did not find a way to aggregate several tun interf=
aces, as I usually do with eth interfaces using bonding (ifenslave, etc).=
It appears that tun interfaces don't support ifenslave tricks...
>>>>
>>>> Any help appreciated...
>>>>
>>>> Here's the configuration
>>>> Host 1:=20
>>>> Dual Pentium III (Coppermine)
>>>> 1G RAM
>>>> SuSE 9.2
>>>> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
>>>> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>>>>
>>>> Host 2:
>>>> Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.00GHz
>>>> 1G RAM
>>>> SuSE 9.2
>>>> 2.6.8-24.3-smp
>>>> VTun ver 3.X 05/10/2005
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Tomte
>>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>>> Nagyobb szabads=E1gra v=E1gysz? T=F6rj ki a n=E9gy fal k=F6z=FCl!
>>>> Start ADSL el=F5fizet=E9sedhez az EuroWeb mostant=F3l havi 100 perc =
ingyenes WiFi hozz=E1f=E9r=E9st biztos=EDt sz=E1modra.
>>>> R=E9szletek: http://www.freestart.hu <http://www.freestart.hu&gt;
>>>>
>>>> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, secu=
rity?
>>>> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your j=
ob easier
>>>> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Ge=
ronimo
>>>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&=
dat=3D121642 <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D=
263057&dat=3D121642>
>>>> _______________________________________________ Vtun-Users mailing l=
ist Vtun-Users@... <mailto:Vtun-Users@...=
.net> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
>>>> =20
>>> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, secur=
ity?
>>> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your jo=
b easier
>>> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Ger=
onimo
>>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&d=
at=3D121642 <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D=
263057&dat=3D121642>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Vtun-Users mailing list
>>> Vtun-Users@... <mailto:Vtun-Users@...=
.net>
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
>>> =20
>> =20
>> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securi=
ty?
>> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job=
easier
>> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Gero=
nimo
>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&da=
t=3D121642 <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D=
263057&dat=3D121642>
>> =20
>> _______________________________________________
>> Vtun-Users mailing list
>> Vtun-Users@... <mailto:Vtun-Users@...=
net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
>> =20
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
>
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, securit=
y?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job =
easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geron=
imo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=
=3D121642
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vtun-Users mailing list
> Vtun-Users@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vtun-users
> =20